Saving the World With Cheap LSD

“LSD acted as a unifying force, an equal opportunity enlightener. It was a bargain at $5 a hit in the 1970s; still is.”

According to an op ed article in the Ottawa Citizen LSD can enlighten and save us all.

Millions of people have experienced transcendence through LSD (lysergic acid diethylamide). The creative energy unleashed by Mr. Hofmann's chemical catalyst has had a tremendous impact on our world.

Acid's effect on Western culture was profound, although most of the other associated elements were already in place. The peace movement, ecology, civil rights, changing gender roles and rock and roll - all of these things were well under way by the time LSD escaped the laboratory and hit the streets. There was already a counter-cultural drug scene; Allen Ginsberg had already written Howl. By 1962, when recreational or "street" acid became available in North America, psychedelic research was already causing chaos within the ivory tower.
...

For most, however, it was like pushing a big reset button on the backs of their heads: suddenly they could see life with a childlike wonder again, and be thrilled at the thought of it. LSD made people happier, better at their work, better citizens and parents.

LSD honours, exhilarates, and empowers the majority of trippers by allowing them to see past the patterns of everyday life and into a deeper level of meaning. It clarifies the big concepts such as love, family, and purpose; but also the little things: leaves and fingerprints. The heartbreaking beauty of a smile. LSD is a joyful surprise.

So why are the police not handing it out to solve all our crime and social problems. The United Nations should be distributing it worldwide to finally bring us world peace.

Indeed, the article even states “No one has ever died of an LSD overdose.” This statement is immediately preceded by “Although the odd person still jumps off a building thinking he can fly, that sort of thing is far less common nowadays.” But I guess that’s acceptable because those deaths were not caused by overdoses, but just the normal dose.

The article also states “Some who used LSD did have horrible experiences, or "bad trips." For a few it was the wedge that broke their grip on sanity once and for all.” But a few people going insane is a small price to pay to enlighten and save the planet.

Timothy Leary once said that LSD causes fear and anger - in the minds of people who have not taken it. Today as in Leary's era, most opposition to the use of psychedelics comes from those who have no experience whatsoever of their effects.

With those “wise words” I will leave it to you to judge. After all, only junkies have a right to comment on the effects of drugs.

Banned In China Ottawa

Apparently, if you belong to a persecuted group you are assumed to be protesting, so you are not allowed to participate in Ottawa’s Canadian Tulip Festival “Where Ideas Bloom”.

The Ottawa Citizen reported “Organizers of the Canadian Tulip Festival faced accusations of censorship yesterday for the last-minute cancellation of a performance by a marching band of Falun Gong practitioners during one of the festival's opening ceremonies.” The Citizen article further stated “Organizers claim that had festival staff known the Tian Guo Marching Band were all Falun Gong members, they never would have been booked at the festival.” The article also stated “"We came here to celebrate a cultural event, and our religion should not stop us from participating," band spokeswoman Grace Wollensak said”

One can only wonder if the organizers would have said the same thing about a group of Catholics or Jews or even Muslims.

The only justification given was an assumption that the group was going to protest because they are known to be persecuted by the Chinese government, and the Chinese Embassy is a sponsor of the Festival and had a representative at the event.

I would like to draw readers to the following summary of facts posted on the CBC website by “GraceW”.

I feel obliged to clarify some facts:

1. We just applied to perform at Dow’s lake, not at the opening ceremony.

2. We send the link of the band in the application so the Tulip officer had chance to know everything about the band. http://tianguoband.org/, where the past performances (70 parades in community/cultural events in two years), as well as Falun Gong connection and uniforms are all clearly presented.

3. After the review of our materials, the program coordinator invited the band to play at the opening ceremony: O Canada and Maple Leaf Forever

4. The band accepted the invitation as an honor, not intent to ‘hijack’ the event as organizer claimed.

5. The appearance of the band at the Tulip Festival has no difference from the photos in the link that we sent to the Tulip Festival program coordinator. In another words, the band dressed up exactly the same as they did in the St. Patrick parade in Ottawa earlier this year and won the award of ‘Best Band’. Nobody accused of the band as ‘political’ or ‘protest’. http://tianguoband.org/News/2008/2008-03-15-St.Patrick-Ottawa.html

6. The fact is that we were removed on the basis of our name being shown. What political messages could be carried by playing O Canada and Maple Leaf Forever.

7. The band represents a cultural group that wants to participate in Canadian activities as ordinary members of this multi-cultural society. The identify of the band members should not be judged or discriminated.

8. Falun Gong is not a protest word. It is the name of our group. The fact that we are persecuted, and protest the persecution, it is not our fault and does not mean our name must be hidden from public view. If that were true, then no one should be allowed to use the words "African-American," "Jewish," etc., in a community event. In fact, suggesting such is already siding with the persecutor, accepting that there is something wrong with this group.

9. The band has performed in over 70 community events and has won numerous awards. To say the band's effort to join this community event was a "stunt" is insulting.

I think all governments, federal, provincial, and municipal should rethink their funding of this event in relation to the organizers disregard of Canada’s constitutionally entrenched policies of freedom of religion and multiculturalism.

And the organizers should be ashamed to call themselves Canadians.

Tour Nortel 2008 - Hardest Tour Nortel Yet

Every year I participate in the Tour Nortel as part of a team of mountain bikers raising funds for the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario (CHEO). For the last few years I have rode on a team sponsored by the Ottawa Mountain Bike Association (OMBA).

(click to enlarge)
After a couple of nice sunny years, this year it was raining, evident by the smaller number of riders that seemed to be there for the start of the tour. They also raised the length of the long route from 70 to 80 kilometres. But I have rode in the rain before, the first two years I rode were rainstorms, and another 10 kilometres is no big deal, as I have ridden up to 120 kilometres in one ride. Something else would cause my struggle this year.

I started out riding with the main OMBA group and soon realized that perhaps I should add more layers, as the cold and wet was becoming noticeable, but I didn’t want to leave my group. However, I ended up dropping behind the group going up the infamous Corkstown Road Hill, which was probably a good thing, since I now had no reason not to pull over and add more layers. This year I was wise enough to carry extra clothes in my backpack.

I found the rest of the start a real struggle and was contemplating turning around at the 35 km turn around point and just doing the shorter route. But I was revitalized when I got to it and met up with the rest of the OMBA riders who encouraged me to keep going. At that point I joined Cat and Mario and Gabrielle’s group as they were going a slightly slower pace than the main OMBA group. I seemed to get my second wind and the ride to the 80km turn around point was a “breeze”. The group stopped just prior to the turn around point and we got to share “OMBA baker” Chris’s goodies that he had baked for the group and were in my backpack.

When we turned around I then realized the “breeze” that was at our back was a brutal headwind that was now facing us. I ended up having to slow my pace and drop back from the group for the rest of the ride, which, at this point, was a real struggle. But, finally the wind was at my back again when I got to that first section that had caused me problems and I realized that it had been a headwind that caused my original struggle.

Revitalized I was on track again, at least until myself and a few other riders came to an intersection back in the urban area without a Tour Nortel direction sign. One of the riders used his intuition to take what I later realized was a bit of a shortcut to get us back on the official route.

I ended up getting back at 1:15 after all the festivities were over and headed home for a warm bath and rest. Despite all the struggles I never had to walk my bike, not even up the killer Huntmar Hill.

(click to enlarge)
It was another great day of riding with my OMBA friends. I rode a total of 82.7 kilometres in four hours and nineteen minutes with an average speed of 19.1 kilometres an hour and a maximum downhill speed of 54.4 kilometres an hour. At least that is what my GPS says.

I raised $625 and the three OMBA teams raised $6, 441 for the Tour Nortel and CHEO.

Rabble

Unfortunately I did not have time to blog today so I will point you to a web site worth checking out.

Happy International Workers Day

Happy May Day

Mountain Biking In The Spring

Rutted Muddy Trail from Spring Biking
For those of us that put our bikes away for the winter, when the first sign of Spring arrives we want to get out on the trails. However more often than not the trails are not ready for riding, usually being wet and muddy. Of course to some people that adds to the fun.

While one may be able to argue that riding muddy trails does no damage beyond the trail and does not affect the surrounding plant or animal life there is no doubt that it affects the trails.

These are the comments posted in a public forum by local mountain bikers about rutting caused by riding muddy trails:

"Watch out for the ruts. I got caught in one at speed between the first and second v-trees. Threw my right shoulder smack into a tree. Though I didn't wipe I have a large bruise to show for it. Anywhere it get's muddy in SMH (South March Highlands) is now a rutted mess..."

"I find fixing ruts to be more challenging than riding them. Riding them can get downright annoying when they go on forever. Way more annoying when they suddenly toss you off your line into a tree."

"The main reason to stay off the muddy trails is because of the erosion.. The more the trails erode the less fun they are to ride and the more work required to maintain them. "

And of course it is not just mountain bikers that notice bike ruts in the mud but also other trail users, which does little to raise the image of mountain biking in the community at a time when we need to be making friends, not enemies, and building partnerships with other trail users.

When it comes to the greenbelt trails, biking is barely tolerated, while being officially banned. The following was stated in an e-mail from an NCC representative:

"We know that there is a lot of interest in off-road riding on Greenbelt hiking trails. On the other hand, section (16) of the NCC Traffic & Property Regulations states..."No person shall ride a bicycle on property of the Commission other than a driveway or on a bicycle path set aside by the Commission for the purpose...". While we have not actively tried to enforce this particular regulation, we do not condone the practice. There are long-term impacts on the trails and surrounding area, particularly rutting, trail erosion, trail widening as users veer off the designated route to avoid ruts and muddy surface, and destruction of adjacent vegetation. In the winter, we want to discourage bike riders who may travel across groomed ski tracks."

While this statement does reflect a need for some education of the NCC about the relative effects of hiking and biking on the trails, one cannot dispute the concerns about rutting from riding muddy trails. If we want to convince the NCC, and other trail users, that mountain biking should be encouraged, and not just tolerated, we are going to have to start riding more responsibly.

For me, the most annoying thing about people riding muddy trails in the spring is that the rutting slows down the natural drying process. Wet and muddy trails dry out fairly quickly in the summer when it is hot. However in the spring, when it is cool and the ground is still partly frozen, the drying process takes longer and it is not helped by ruts that hold the water and disrupt the natural drainage patterns. Those of us who avoid riding the mud holes in the spring have to wait longer to ride the trails due to the actions of those who do not have patience to wait a few weeks for the trails to dry, and when the trails do dry out they are often a rutted mess that takes longer to dry each time it rains.

If we keep the trails in good condition they will dry quickly after summer rainfalls.

So what should we do in the meantime. There are a number of options. We do not need to ride in the dirt to ride. Pedaling is pedaling. We can start getting into condition for the technical single track by riding gravel and paved paths like the Trans-Canada Trail.

Should the Right to Strike be Sacrosanct

The labour movement has always held the Right to Strike to be sacrosanct. In reality though, the biggest gains made by workers have been gained during illegal, rather than legal strikes. Indeed it is union solidarity rather than the legal Right to Strike that is key. Workers will always have the effective ability to strike as long as they have solidarity in their ranks.

But that does not mean that strikes are always the best way to settle a dispute that cannot be settled at the bargaining table. As one who worked for, perhaps the most essential of public services, democracy itself, I did not have the Right to Strike. Instead we had compulsory arbitration. On at least one occasion simply serving notice of arbitration brought the employer (House of Commons) back to the table with an offer we could not reject. I have to admit it was somewhat reassuring to not have to worry about going on strike and losing income to settle a bargaining dispute. And, of course, the bottom line was that as long as we had solidarity we always had the effective ability to strike if that became necessary.

The recent TTC strike fiasco is an example of the ineffective use of the legal Right to Strike. The TTC workers are one of those groups of public sector workers that have a fictitious legal Right to Strike. It is often expressed this way by politicians: “we will respect your Right to Strike as long as you do not abuse it”. And by “abuse it” they mean actually “go on strike”.

The TTC strike was a fiasco because the workers went on strike knowing they would be legislated back to work and knowing they did not have the intention, or the solidarity, to continue the strike after they were legislated back to work. So all they accomplished was upsetting the general public. There was obviously something else going on there. The strike was more of an “emotional” response to something going on between workers and management beyond the terms of the proposed contract or something going on between the workers and their union leadership.

The real problem with public sector strikes is that they do not affect the employer’s bottom line. In a private sector strike you shut down production and the employers revenues and profits go down. In a public sector strike you shut down public services and the employers costs go down. There is a real bottom line incentive in that situation for the employer to try to manipulate the union into a strike.

A more effective TTC union response would have been to take the initiative to propose arbitration at the same time they announced the membership had rejected the tentative agreement. This way they could have not only avoided the wrath of the public but gained their support. Instead they called a strike they had no intention or ability to continue, knowing that the end result would be compulsory arbitration.

Why is arbitration not used more often voluntarily in the public sector.

Employers have often expressed a dislike for it because it means turning over “budgetary decisions” to a third party, or so they claim. They also, apparently, fear costlier settlements than those after a strike. It also means they do not have the savings from unpaid wages during a strike to offset wage increases awarded by an arbitrator.

Unions do not like it because of the feeling that the Right to Strike is sacrosanct and that agreeing to arbitration can be seen as a sign of weakness.

Strikes are not always successful. The big problem with public sector strikes is that they affect the public more than the employer and indeed they can save the employer money. Another way that does not upset the public is worth trying. I think public sector unions have a lot to gain by giving arbitration a chance. It does not require giving up your Right to Strike, just not using it for one set of negotiations at a time.

It may very well be that in many cases the employer will reject arbitration. So be it. The employer can then feel the wrath of the public when workers are forced to strike.

Solidarity Forever

TTC Strike - Special Weekend Fifth Column

So what is going on here.

The first factor to consider is why did the membership reject the tentative agreement, proving yet again, that despite what the right wing says about radical union leaders, it is often the rank and file that is more radical than the leadership. When the leadership negotiates what it believes is the best agreement it can get and it is rejected, it is usually a sign that there is a bigger problem than the contract provisions. Usually it means there is a bigger labour-management issue than wages and benefits and that the workers feel ill treated or not respected by the employer. Or, as some have suggested in this case, it can mean that the members do not feel well represented by their leadership.

What of the union response. The official response is a legitimate one. If the union had announced a strike would begin at the beginning of the work week on Monday there would have been considerable public outrage over the weekend and grounds for concern for the safety of the workers.

What if the union had responded otherwise. The union is in a legal strike position and the membership had democratically rejected the tentative agreement by a significant margin. If the union had not announced an almost immediate strike allowing the system to be shut down in an orderly manner, there would have undoubtedly been wildcat walkouts leading to a disorderly shutdown of the system and greater public outrage.

As it is, the union leadership’s response sets the stage for transit service to resume on Monday morning.

The Supreme Court Rules !

As my daughters would say “The Supreme Court Rules”. And just why does the Supreme Court rule. The Supreme Court rules because the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in “R. v. A.M.” that young people do not lose their constitutional protection against “unreasonable search and seizure” under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms simply because they are in a school.

According to a CBC report:

The first case involved an unexpected police visit to St. Patrick's High School in Sarnia, Ont., in 2002. During that visit, students were confined to their classrooms as a trained police dog sniffed out backpacks in an empty gymnasium.

The dog led police to a pile of backpacks, one of which contained marijuana and magic mushrooms. A youth, identified only as A.M, was subsequently charged with possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking.

But police admitted they didn't have a search warrant or any prior tip about drugs in the school. The officers had instead visited on the basis of a long-standing invitation from school officials.

In 2004, the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld a previous trial judge's decision to exclude the drugs as evidence and acquit the youth. The court referred to the incident as "a warrantless, random search with the entire student body held in detention."

In Friday's ruling, the Supreme Court wrote that while "a warrantless sniffer-dog search is available where reasonable suspicion is demonstrated" in this case, "the dog-sniff search was unreasonably undertaken because there was no proper justification."

The court wrote that students' backpacks "objectively command a measure of privacy."

"No doubt ordinary businessmen and businesswomen riding along on public transit or going up and down on elevators in office towers would be outraged at any suggestion that the contents of their briefcases could randomly be inspected by the police without 'reasonable suspicion' of illegality," the court wrote.

Indeed, the Supreme Court does rule. Young people are slowly gaining the recognition that they deserve the same constitutional rights as anyone else and should not be discriminated against solely because of their age.